EPTOn February 28 2011 15:23 N3rV[Green] wrote:
One of the worst things I have seen out of this whole thing is the explanation that blizzard gave on their reasoning behind their new 1v1 maps.
About slag pits, they bring up metalopolis being a favorite of players, and said that slag pits was meant to be a similar layout to metal but "more macro based". Metal has MORE expansions than slag pits and LONGER rush (not by much its still pretty nasty on metal) in close positions. What you call a "more macro based map" than metal is not. You are straight up not giving the truth.
Slag pits a "macro heavy" map my ass blizzard, there is no 3rd base for people to take. Is 2 base vs 2 base a macro game blizzard? And if that is your definition of macro play please go talk to some actual pro gamers about their feelings on what a macro map really is.
Slag pits is NOT a macro based map. I'm sorry blizzard. And for the record, just stop throwing rocks on anything that might be nice as a 3rd base, it's not something ANYbody likes.
There was a response from blizzard on their decision making process for the ladder map changes. All it does is further show the complete lack of understanding that blizzard has for what good maps are. You have really screwed up here blizzard, please take action for your failure.
(4)Shakuras Plateau
This map we decided to remove for a different reason. There isn't a huge problem with this map, but we felt there aren't enough interesting features of this map. The natural expansion is easy to take and defend; there are only two possible attack paths only one of which is generally used, and main bases aren't easy to harass. For a change, we wanted to replace this relatively plain map with something new.
This is what you said.
First problem. "Interesting features" WTF are these and how do they make games on shakuras worse? There is no justification. And for your notes blizzard, most people HATE rocks all over the map. We really, really hate them.
Second problem. " The natural expansion is easy to take and defend" How could this possibly be a bad thing when many people are complaining and you acknowledge that people complain about 1 base allins and close distances. This "map feature" makes for MUCH more interesting games.
Third problem. " there are only two possible attack paths only one of which is generally used" Where is this data taken from? Are all the games you look at 2 base vs 2 base? Do NONE of the games go to full on half map vs half map? Off the top of my head, in a late game situation on that map there are the top and bottom hallways, the middle path, and the top and bottom debris blocked paths in the middle. That looks to me like 5 different paths of attack, not to mention drop routes. Ok nevermind I'll add the drop routes to make around 9 different attack paths possible in a late game situation. This statement from your map team is false, do you stand behind false information?
Fourth problem. " main bases aren't easy to harass" Again a false statement from you blizzard, where do these come from? There is a backdoor into your main base, the main is relatively large with many pockets for dropping unnoticed, at least three paths different paths for reapers to enter any of the mains, and a mineral line with space behind it to hide a banshee out of range from the edge from hydras or stalkers. There is nothing about this map that shows the mains to be "difficult to harass"
Lastly you call it a "Plain map" the day after one of the greatest games of the GSL in entirety took place ON shakuras plateau.
These are two posts I made on the battle.net forums, I encourage other's to go and post on their sticky about the new maps. Pretty sure it has a better chance of being read there than here. But I thought there were some good points in here to bring over to TL xD
One of the worst things I have seen out of this whole thing is the explanation that blizzard gave on their reasoning behind their new 1v1 maps.
About slag pits, they bring up metalopolis being a favorite of players, and said that slag pits was meant to be a similar layout to metal but "more macro based". Metal has MORE expansions than slag pits and LONGER rush (not by much its still pretty nasty on metal) in close positions. What you call a "more macro based map" than metal is not. You are straight up not giving the truth.
Slag pits a "macro heavy" map my ass blizzard, there is no 3rd base for people to take. Is 2 base vs 2 base a macro game blizzard? And if that is your definition of macro play please go talk to some actual pro gamers about their feelings on what a macro map really is.
Slag pits is NOT a macro based map. I'm sorry blizzard. And for the record, just stop throwing rocks on anything that might be nice as a 3rd base, it's not something ANYbody likes.
There was a response from blizzard on their decision making process for the ladder map changes. All it does is further show the complete lack of understanding that blizzard has for what good maps are. You have really screwed up here blizzard, please take action for your failure.
(4)Shakuras Plateau
This map we decided to remove for a different reason. There isn't a huge problem with this map, but we felt there aren't enough interesting features of this map. The natural expansion is easy to take and defend; there are only two possible attack paths only one of which is generally used, and main bases aren't easy to harass. For a change, we wanted to replace this relatively plain map with something new.
This is what you said.
First problem. "Interesting features" WTF are these and how do they make games on shakuras worse? There is no justification. And for your notes blizzard, most people HATE rocks all over the map. We really, really hate them.
Second problem. " The natural expansion is easy to take and defend" How could this possibly be a bad thing when many people are complaining and you acknowledge that people complain about 1 base allins and close distances. This "map feature" makes for MUCH more interesting games.
Third problem. " there are only two possible attack paths only one of which is generally used" Where is this data taken from? Are all the games you look at 2 base vs 2 base? Do NONE of the games go to full on half map vs half map? Off the top of my head, in a late game situation on that map there are the top and bottom hallways, the middle path, and the top and bottom debris blocked paths in the middle. That looks to me like 5 different paths of attack, not to mention drop routes. Ok nevermind I'll add the drop routes to make around 9 different attack paths possible in a late game situation. This statement from your map team is false, do you stand behind false information?
Fourth problem. " main bases aren't easy to harass" Again a false statement from you blizzard, where do these come from? There is a backdoor into your main base, the main is relatively large with many pockets for dropping unnoticed, at least three paths different paths for reapers to enter any of the mains, and a mineral line with space behind it to hide a banshee out of range from the edge from hydras or stalkers. There is nothing about this map that shows the mains to be "difficult to harass"
Lastly you call it a "Plain map" the day after one of the greatest games of the GSL in entirety took place ON shakuras plateau.
These are two posts I made on the battle.net forums, I encourage other's to go and post on their sticky about the new maps. Pretty sure it has a better chance of being read there than here. But I thought there were some good points in here to bring over to TL xD
I agree 100%.
The main problem is that Blizzard focuses too much on early play and not enough on fully developed 3+ base play. This is very obvious when you look at the maps blizzard has supplied us with: SoW, BS, Desert Oasis, DQ, Scrap etc.
The second problem is the choice of destructible rocks placement. Why do they insist on placing destructibles in the main? I actually like the rocks-feature on certain maps because it doesn't stop you from expanding safely, but BS type of rocks are HORRIBLE. All you do is units units units.
I also think the number of bases is quite limited on most 1v1 maps. Why not make a 1v1 14base map?
EDIT: Found this interview that confirms blizz thoughts about 2base play. They seem to believe 2bases vs 2base is the "peak" of macro play.
http://www.gosugamers.net/starcraft2/news/10882-a-closer-look-on-the-1on1-maps-of-starcraft-2
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/K6byp.png)
